[WITHDRAWN] Championing LGBTQ Tolerance and Acceptance

[Great Algerstonia]

How is this a "fine example"? This resolution is entirely OOC, offers an opinion on wholly OOC content, brings explicitly OOC content (Pride Month) into the Security Council, and all in all seems like a case of [insert popular thing here to pass in a Declaration], combined with [throw in everything remotely positive about said popular thing to get it to pass in a Declaration]...

And… how is that a bad thing? Most SC resolutions have significant OOC aspects to them.

Because mixing IC and OOC is never a good thing. The two aspects should stay firmly seperate.

[Cappedore]

The cause is fine, but the more I read it, the more I feel that this would definitely fall in GA boundaries. So the County of Cappedore does not support this proposal. It's a good and well-written proposal, but we find ourselves questioning its legality - despite what gensec has said.

I disagree. This is a fine example of what the new Declarations category should entail. Put this in the GA as is and large bits of it break several rules, and it would not be an easy fix.

The more I read this resolution, the more it reads more as GA legislation. Sorry, I simply do not feel like this is SC material. the only reason it would break several rules in the GA is that there is already a resolution for it, so to me, this resolution just seems like a waste of time to the SC.

[Daarwyrth]

Considering the fact that this resolution proposal is getting a majority of "against" votes on various regional forums and their inner regional votes, I withdrew the proposal. I will not give opponents of the LGBTQ community the satisfaction of this being voted down.

The new Declarations category is a new element of the Security Council that I really think could be broad and diverse. After all, a Declaration on Hippopotamuses was passed, so it stands to reason that a Declaration of support of how regions are open and tolerant of the LGBTQ community would fit in as well. Yet apparently there is a sense of selectiveness regarding what fits in with the SC and what not. A joke proposal on hippopotamuses can pass, a serious proposal on LGBTQ support is apparently too much or "a waste of the SC's time".

Very well, if that is the choice of the community, namely to limit what Declarations can be even though there is room for them to be broad and diverse, who am I to argue against that as a lone voice that sees it differently. As such, the SC need not bother itself with this proposal. Thank you all for the feedback and commentary nonetheless.

[Tinhampton]

I would have cast my 21ish votes in favour of this Declaration (and actively encouraged voter turnout among supporters in The Rejected Realms, whose delegate is ten times more powerful and where the vote was tied 1-1 at the time of withdrawal).

Sophia will continue to support proposals of a similar nature in future.

[Darastrixethe]

The Phoenix Kingdom wishes to express its dismay at the withdrawal of this proposal.

[Daarwyrth]

The Phoenix Kingdom wishes to express its dismay at the withdrawal of this proposal.

It is a shame, yes. Yet as said before, the regional votes on the regional forums of the biggest regions showed me that 'against' outweighed 'for'. Knowing that many opponents of the LGBTQ community would love to see such a proposal being voted down, I chose to deny them that pleasure.

In addition, some voices said it was a waste of the SC's time. That baffles me too, as I'd wager praising the efforts of regions to be inclusive and accepting of LGBTQ players is anything but a waste of the SC's time, and necessary to promote further tolerance and acceptance. Yet as it turns out, maintaining a narrow definition of what a Declaration should be is more important to some players than trying to do something good for the players. A shame, but what can you do.

[Nova Vandalia]

The Phoenix Kingdom wishes to express its dismay at the withdrawal of this proposal.

It is a shame, yes. Yet as said before, the regional votes on the regional forums of the biggest regions showed me that 'against' outweighed 'for'. Knowing that many opponents of the LGBTQ community would love to see such a proposal being voted down, I chose to deny them that pleasure.

In addition, some voices said it was a waste of the SC's time. That baffles me too, as I'd wager praising the efforts of regions to be inclusive and accepting of LGBTQ players is anything but a waste of the SC's time, and necessary to promote further tolerance and acceptance. Yet as it turns out, maintaining a narrow definition of what a Declaration should be is more important to some players than trying to do something good for the players. A shame, but what can you do.

Sad to see this withdrawn but very understanding of your position Daarwyrth. Also very shocked by the news that large regions would reject, definitely changes my view on the community as a whole.

[Daarwyrth]

Sad to see this withdrawn but very understanding of your position Daarwyrth. Also very shocked by the news that large regions would reject, definitely changes my view on the community as a whole.

I had expected more support from those regions, yes, considering some of them eagerly participated in putting up LGBTQ flags as their regional flags. I was deeply saddened by the fact that defining what a Declaration should be was more of a priority than actually supporting something that praised tolerance and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, and through it would have sent a positive message into the community, perhaps inspired more regions to adopt similar approaches.

It's almost like the corporations that put up pride flags during Pride Month. Apparently, this proposal did not fit the "corporate brand" they had in mind for Declarations. A pity.

Still, I appreciate those that would have supported the proposal. I really wished more people and especially regions would have looked at this proposal differently.

[Great Algerstonia]

FWIW, Daarwyrth, I thought your proposal was good and in good faith for a good cause. However, I couldn't support it because I fundamentally believe that the World Assembly should be entirely in-character without any mixture of out-of-character. This proposal was good and well-written and I commend you for making it, despite my own misgivings due to a standard I have.